Suppose that a Russian company is planning to distribute to Russian-speaking audiences a film that was produced in It...

Asaad32 on May 7, 2020

Again, not sure what is seperating the answer choice from the other options.

Maybe it is just this passage, or something I am reading is just flying right over my head, but there are several choices that don't stick out to me as right or wrong for any particular reason. The author never seems to take a stance on what "should" be down, but more or less just says what is being done and that it shouldn't be that way.

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

hkolon on June 3, 2020

Yes someone please explain this! ^

mfujii on July 3, 2020

Hi! I also got this question wrong. But after looking it over, I think the strategy for this question would be to eliminate choices rather than look for the correct one.

A) Wrong because passage never mentions explanatory material.
B) Wrong because passage never mentions critics watching first and then public
C) Not wrong because passage mentions subtitling and never says to not subtitle at all, and also says "Subtitling may be simply incompetent, full of mistakes, or used for actual censorship." (13-15) ie "translation strictly faithful to the original" is OK.
D) Same as above. Wrong because passage never advocates for no subtitles.
E) Wrong because passage is generally against changes and does not say it's ok to do so "to make the filmmaker's intentions clearer." Also says "Some films are reedited to render them 'more understandable' by their target audiences," (16-18) as something that should not be done.

That's all I got. Would love to hear any other explanations!